Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Sudha – Appellant
Versus
Hargian Singh – Respondent
Judgment :
Vikram Aggarwal, J.
The present revision petition, preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assails order dated 30.08.2024, passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Assandh, vide which the application filed by petitioner/plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'CPC') was dismissed.
2. A suit for permanent injunction was filed by the petitioner/ plaintiff. It was claimed that vide mortgage deed dated 20.08.2018, the respondent/defendant had mortgaged his land measuring 6 kanals 15 marlas, situated in Village Ardana, Tehsil Assandh, District Karnal (hereinafter referred to as the 'suit land') in favour of the petitioner/plaintiff for a period of two years, i.e. 18.08.2018 to 18.08.2020, for a consideration of Rs.5,00,000/-. Possession of the suit land had been delivered. It was claimed that the respondent/defendant had been threatening to interfere in the possession of the petitioner/plaintiff over the suit land, as a result of which the suit (Annexure P-1) was instituted.
3. The suit was opposed by way of a written statement (Annexure P-2), wherein it was contended that the mortgage deed was an unre
Amendments to pleadings must be liberally allowed unless they change the nature of the suit or introduce a time-barred claim.
Amendment of pleadings is allowed if necessary for adjudication and does not cause injustice to the other side, as affirmed under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC.
The amendment of pleadings will be allowed even after the expiry of the statutory period of limitation if it does not constitute the addition of a new cause of action or raise a different case, but a....
Amendments to pleadings in civil suits must be granted if necessary for effective adjudication, provided they do not cause harm to the opposing party, affirming a liberal approach in such matters.
The court established that the limitation for suits claiming declaration and possession of immovable property is 12 years under Article 65 of the Limitation Act, countering the trial court's applicat....
Amendments should be allowed for effective adjudication unless they create an entirely new case or disadvantage the opposite party.
The appellate court upheld that plaintiffs' title validly established, and amendments to pleadings for possession did not change the suit's nature, ensuring compliance with statutory limitation.
Amendments to pleadings post-trial commencement are not permissible unless due diligence is shown, ensuring they do not alter the fundamental character of the case.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
